On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Steven Clift <[email protected]> wrote:
> If I controlled the purse strings, I'd require a justification for not > using/leveraging existing open source CMS platforms that have a > demonstrated base. Or better yet, fund the creation of > modules/plug-ins for a few CMSes based on a publicly crafted > specification that also encourages those who host proprietary content > systems for government to competitively add similar, perhaps > interoperable/aggregatable features. Not quite the same, but there is an attempt at a GPL council CMS: http://www.aplaws.org.uk/project/laws.php It's horrid, and none of the councils are able to talk to each other about common features they want made for it. Also, as far as I know only one council has a technical person with commit access working for them -- everyone else uses a contracted company to fork the project and deal with the result of their miscommunication (merging forked branches etc). Open source, in this case, made no difference, because the council a) didn't talk to other councils and b) just paid someone else to do everything for them. I don't think they even had access to their branch, but even if they did it wouldn't have meant anything. -- Help save the economy: http://seriouschange.org.uk/ E: [email protected] M: 07742079314 _______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
